FOOTNOTES

[1] The Special Committee which was set up for the purpose of reforming the Law relating to
partnership, discussed it in Para 15 of its report. Some of the conditions it mentioned were
the typical nature of Hindu Joint Family business.
[2] Preamble to Indian Partnership Act, 1932.
[3] Section 1(3) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.

[22] Section 58(1) clause (a) to (f) provide the following to be mentioned in the application
for registration:(a) The firm name, (b) the place or the principle place of business of the
firm, (c) the names of any other places where the firm carries on business, (d) the date when
each partner joined the firm, (e) the names in full and permanent addresses of the partners,
and (f) the duration of the firm.
[23] Hiralal Agarwal v.State of Bihar, AIR 1972 Patna 507 (DB)
[24] Oudh Cocogem & Provision Stores v CIT, 1969(69) ITR 819
[25] 1984 Ker LT 420
[30] The Law Commission of India, in its One Hundred and Seventy Eighth report, taking
into account certain judgements of the Supreme Court of India, and to avoid any uncertainty,
had expressed a view that the bar should be restricted to suits by the unregistered firm (or
claims to set off or other proceedings) in respect of the rights arising out of contracts entered
into in the course of business. It accordingly had proposed the addition of an explanation to
Section 69 of the Partnership Act to the effect that a right arising from a contract shall
mean a right arising from a contract made in the course of business.
[33] Loonkaram Sethia v Mr.Ivan E.John and Ors, AIR 1977 SC 336,347;

[39] Halsbury Statutes, 3rd edn. Vol 37, p 867

[42] GP Singhs Interpretation of Statutes, 7th edn., 1999 pp 196-197.
[49] (2004) 52 SCL 345 (Kar)
[51] Syed Wahid Hussain v Mahmud Hasan Khan, AIR 1961 All 409,413 (DB)
[60] Kamal Pushpa v D.R. Construction Company AIR 1996 M.P. 139, 140, 141
[61] Kamal Pushpa v D.R. Construction Company AIR 1996 M.P. 139, 141: See also
Krishnan Motor Service v. H.B. Vittal Kamath AIR 1996 SC 2209; Prem Lata v Ishar Das
Chaman Lal AIR 1995 SCW 505
[62] AIR 2000 SC 2676
[63] (2004) 3 SCC 155
[64] (2004) 3 SCC 155
[65] Nand Kishore v Maheshwari Mills, AIR 1953 MB 42, 43
31,32

FOOTNOTES

[1] The Special Committee which was set up for the purpose of reforming the Law relating to
partnership, discussed it in Para 15 of its report. Some of the conditions it mentioned were
the typical nature of Hindu Joint Family business.
[2] Preamble to Indian Partnership Act, 1932.
[3] Section 1(3) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.
[6] The UK Registration of Business Names Act, 1916 makes it compulsory not just firms but
also individuals carrying on business to register both the business names and the personal
names of the parties in the form therein prescribed. Registration is not called for in case of a
firm name consisting only of the usual names of the partners, but in practise the great
majority of firms have to be registered.
8 Mulla, Partnership Act, Ist edn. 1934, Page 88.
[9] The committee consisted of Sir Brojendra Lal Mitter, Sir Dinesh F Mulla, Sir Alladi
Krishnaswamy Iyer and Mr Arthur Eggar. Earlier the law governing partnership was
contained in the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
[10] Mulla, Partnership Act, 1st edn. 1934, Page 167, 176-177.
[12] Mulla, Partnership Act, 1st edn. 1934, Page 167, 186-187. Para 23 of the Report of the
Special Committee also refers to those who deal with the firm.
[13] Para 23 of the Report of the Special Committee.
[14] Section 68(1) Indian Partnership Act, 1932. The Special Committee Report, Para 18.
See also Bhardia Brothers v. Union of India, AIR 1973 Ori 28
[15] The Report of the Special Committee, reference to Paras 18 and 19
[16] Halsbury Statutes, 3rd edn. Vol 37 p 867
[17] Gokuldas Rampratap Marwadi v.Kesheorao Janurao Marathe, AIR 1937 Nag 134.
[22] Section 58(1) clause (a) to (f) provide the following to be mentioned in the application
for registration:(a) The firm name, (b) the place or the principle place of business of the
firm, (c) the names of any other places where the firm carries on business, (d) the date when
each partner joined the firm, (e) the names in full and permanent addresses of the partners,
and (f) the duration of the firm.
[23] Hiralal Agarwal v.State of Bihar, AIR 1972 Patna 507 (DB)
[24] Oudh Cocogem & Provision Stores v CIT, 1969(69) ITR 819
[25] 1984 Ker LT 420
[26] Law of Partnership: C.L.Gupta, 3rd Edn., Modern Law Publications, Allahabad 2001:
see also Commissioner of Income Tax Andhra Pradesh v. Jayalakshmi Rice & Oil Mills. AIR
(1971) SC 1015
[30] The Law Commission of India, in its One Hundred and Seventy Eighth report, taking
into account certain judgements of the Supreme Court of India, and to avoid any uncertainty,
had expressed a view that the bar should be restricted to suits by the unregistered firm (or
claims to set off or other proceedings) in respect of the rights arising out of contracts entered
into in the course of business. It accordingly had proposed the addition of an explanation to
Section 69 of the Partnership Act to the effect that a right arising from a contract shall
mean a right arising from a contract made in the course of business.
[33] Loonkaram Sethia v Mr.Ivan E.John and Ors, AIR 1977 SC 336,347;
[34] 1958 Jab LJ 624, as per Law of Partnership: C.L.Gupta, 3rd Edn., Modern Law
Publications, Allahabad 2001.
[35] Bharat Sarvodaya Mills Co. Ltd v. M/s Mohatta Brothers, AIR (1969) Guj 178
[39] Halsbury Statutes, 3rd edn. Vol 37, p 867
[42] GP Singhs Interpretation of Statutes, 7th edn., 1999 pp 196-197.
[49] (2004) 52 SCL 345 (Kar)
[50] Para 23 of the Report.
[51] Syed Wahid Hussain v Mahmud Hasan Khan, AIR 1961 All 409,413 (DB)
[60] Kamal Pushpa v D.R. Construction Company AIR 1996 M.P. 139, 140, 141
[61] Kamal Pushpa v D.R. Construction Company AIR 1996 M.P. 139, 141: See also
Krishnan Motor Service v. H.B. Vittal Kamath AIR 1996 SC 2209; Prem Lata v Ishar Das
Chaman Lal AIR 1995 SCW 505
[62] AIR 2000 SC 2676
[63] (2004) 3 SCC 155
[64] (2004) 3 SCC 155
[65] Nand Kishore v Maheshwari Mills, AIR 1953 MB 42, 43
[66] Law of Partnership: C.L.Gupta, 3rd Edn. Modern Law Publications, Allahabad 2001 p
580.